The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit restored last week claims by heirs of Lilly Cassirer against the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection for the return of the Camille Pissarro painting Rue St. Honoré, après-midi, êffet de pluie.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Nuremberg laws, Schwabinger Kunstfund, Cornelius Gurlitt, Lilly Cassirer, California Code of Civil Procedure § 338(c), Dorothy Nelson, Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, Julius Schoeps, Rue St. Honoré après-midi êffet de pluie, Claude Cassirer, Von Saher v. Norton Simon, de Csepel, Jacques Goudstikker, California Code of Civil Procedure § 354.3, Gurlitt Collection, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Hans Sachs, Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasaden, Madame Soler, Bundesgerichtshof, Hildebrand Gurlit, Entartete Kunst, Hans-Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza, Hungarian National Gallery, Nazis, Munich, Deutches Historisches Museum, FSIA, Preemption, Gurlitt, Harry Pregerson, Restitution, field preemption, Marei Von Saher, Herzog collection, Bavaria, Claudia Seger-Thomschitz, Looted Art, World War II, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Pinakothek der Moderne, degenerate art, Altmann v. Republic of Austria, 578 F.3d 1016, Freistaat Bayern, beschlagnahmte Kunst, Camille Pissarro, Kim McLane Wardlaw, Nürnberger Gesetze, Raubkunst, Museum of Fine Arts Boston, Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, verschollene Kunst, Kunstfund München
The coordination office in Magdeburg continues to post details about works of art seized from Cornelius Gurlitt in Schwabing, with a total of 327 works now available for viewing. There has been almost no discussion yet, however, of what process the government will employ to allow claimants to make their case. Those in the United States have options discussed further below.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: veschollene Kunst, Schwabinger Kunstfund Cornelius Gurlitt, Strafprozessordnung, Hildebrand Gurlitt, EBS Dispute Resolution Center, Munich Hoard, IFKUR, Verjährungsfrist, Peter Bert, Germany, Matthias Weller, prescriptive ownership, Nazi-looted art, Gurlitt Collection, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Baden-Württemberg, Entartete Kunst, Nazis, Ingeborg Berggreen-Merkel, Munich, Schwabing, Magdeburg, FSIA, Dispute Resolution in Germany, Bavaria, Looted Art, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, deutches Recht, degenerate art, Altmann v. Republic of Austria, www.lostart.de, stop, Raubkunst, German Civil Code § 221, Sec. 108 German Code of Criminal Procedure, Kunstfund München, Münchner Kunstfund
Ingeborg Berggreen-Merkel, leader of the newly formed federal “Schwabing Art Find” taskforce, announced plans to release information about 590 additional works found in the apartment of Cornelius Gurlitt, after the posting earlier this week of 25 works at www.lostart.de. Meanwhile, the heirs of Max Ernst have publicly disclosed (through their attorney Jürgen Wilhelm in Cologne) their claim to certain of the works in the Gurlitt find. The federal authorities appear to be gaining the upper hand for disclosure against the tax investigators in Bavaria who initially seized the collection, which was not a foregone conclusion.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Cologne, veschollene Kunst, the Lion Tamer, Lempertz, Cornelius Gurlitt, Schwabinger Kunstfund. Kunstfund München, Max Liebermann, Köln, Gurlitt Collection, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Hildebrand Gurlit, Entartete Kunst, Nazis, Ingeborg Berggreen-Merkel, Hermann Goring, Michael Hulton, FSIA, Gurlitt, Restitution, conversion, Looted Art, World War II, degenerate art, Altmann v. Republic of Austria, Löwenbändiger, Raubkunst, Alfred Flechteim, Jürgen Wilhelm, Max Ernst
The Holocaust Art Restitution Project reports today that a new version of Senate Bill 2212, the Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act that would have amended the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to preclude claims against defendants whose “commercial activity” is limited to the loan of artwork whose ownership is in dispute, but which are immunized from seizure pursuant to the Immunity from Seizure Act (22 U.S.C. § 2459). The Art Law Report covered the bill extensively last year. Although the bill as previously passed would have exempted Holocaust claims from the exception, the bill in broad terms was designed to prevent another Malevich v. City of Amsterdam situation, in which the very loan of a painting immunized from seizure was itself held to satisfy the commercial activity jurisdictional requirements of the FSIA.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Holocaust Art Restitution Project, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 22 U.S.C. § 2459, Association of Art Museum Directors, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Immunity from Seizure Act, Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity
Several overlapping issues in recent months have turned what was an awkward elephant in the room into a major issue facing the art world today. Namely: the increasing role that Russia is playing in restitution, loans and exhibition controversies has aggregated to Vladimir Putin an extraordinary amount of influence over these major international legal issues. Combined with the Edward Snowden controversy (and the bizarre story of Putin’s theft of Robert Kraft’s New England Patriots Super Bowl ring), it seems quite clear that Putin enjoys that spotlight. That has not proven to be good news for the art world.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Nazi Germany, Russia, Germany, WWII, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Red Army, Edward Snowden, FSIA, Restitution, New England Patriots, Super Bowl, Vladimir Putin, Robert Kraft, Soviet Union
The First Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a win for the Museum of Fine Arts Boston and Harvard University concerning possession of a number of Iranian antiquities. The ruling left open, however, some interesting questions about the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). In particular, the First Circuit did not have to rule on whether antiquities in a museum are “property” of a source country that could be used to satisfy an unrelated judgment, or whether a museum displaying an object from a foreign country makes the object “used in commercial activity” such that it is no longer immune from seizure under the FSIA.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: cultural property, Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, 28 U.S.C. § 1610, 22 U.S.C. § 2259, Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 116 Stat. 2322, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, § 201 (a), Harvard University, Restitution, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Antiquities, Immunity from Seizure Act, Museums, Museum of Fine Arts Boston, Pub. L. No. 107-297
In a case that has tested the principles of how a defiant sovereign defendant can be compelled to comply with a court order, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has taken an emphatic step in an order issued today. The Russian Federation, the Russian Ministry of Culture and Mass Communications, the Russian State Library, and the Russian State Military Archive will be fined collectively $50,000 per day until they comply with a 2010 judgment to return the library of Menachem Schneerson, the late charismatic leader of the worldwide Chabad Lubavitch movement, to the movement in Brooklyn, New York. Whereas the court lacked any power to compel the seizure of the library itself overseas, the plaintiffs will now be armed with a very real financial bludgeon against the defendants that have thumbed their noses at the U.S. courts for more than three years. In any case where the defendant refuses to obey a court order that court has a wide array of tools to compel compliance, but this case has been an awkward example of the limits on a court of law faced with an uncooperative party overseas. Particularly where the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1603 (the FSIA) was the basis for jurisdiction, as it is in so many wartime art restitution cases, and the fact that the 2010 judgment led to a still-ongoing embargo of art and cultural artifact loans to the United States, the decision is a significant one for the realm of art law.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: cultural property, Lativa, Menachem Schneerson, Germany, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Rebbe, 28 U.S.C. § 1603, Bolshevik, the Russian Ministry of Culture and Mass Communica, Russian Federation, the Russian State Library, FSIA, Restitution, the Russian State Military Archive, World War II, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Agudas Chasei Chabad, Poland, Russian Revolution, Soviet Union, Immunity from Seizure Act
Senate Bill 2212, previously passed by the House of Representatives, seemed to be gathering steam as 2012 came to a close. In November and December bipartisan sponsors were signing on, with no publicly-known opposition as it waited for a Senate Committee on the Judiciary hearing.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: House Resolution 4086, 113th Congress, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 112th Congress, Restitution, Senate Bill 2212, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Immunity from Seizure Act, Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity
The federal register this week noted the addition on November 27, 2012 of Charles Schumer, New York’s senior Senator, as a co-sponsor of Senate Bill 2212, the Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act, the proposed amendment to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act that would exempt from the FSIA the loan of certain cultural objects as a basis to invoke U.S. federal court jurisdiction. The bill has already been passed by the House of Representatives. After passage in march and referral to the Senate Judiciary Committee (on which it should be noted, Schumer sits), their has been no news of the bill’s progress.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Legislation, the Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immun, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, FSIA, Senate Bill 2212, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Charles Schumer, Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity, Art Law Report
Opposition to Senate Bill 2212, the Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act (a bill the Art Law Report favors in its frequent commentaries) has been renewed recently. Senate Bill 2212 (already passed by the House of Representatives) would remove the mere display of a work of art in the United States as a satisfactory basis to satisfy the commercial activity requirement of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act necessary to sue a foreign sovereign here in the United States.
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: Germany, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Plundered Art, 22 U.S.C. § 2459, Restitution, Senate Bill 2212, World War II, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Nikki Georgopulos, Altmann v. Republic of Austria, Immunity from Seizure Act, Nazi theft, Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity, Malevich v. City of Amsterdam, Art Law Report
